Audyssey will correct out a lot of inaccuracies, but it won't fix a speaker's inability to push enough sound -- even with your beastly AVR. Seaton Catalyst!

while cats are great at 2500/3600 per speaker they are out of the budget for most people and a 89db speaker will have no issues hitting reference. and more power is actually quite cheap is desired later on

while cats are great at 2500/3600 per speaker they are out of the budget for most people and a 89db speaker will have no issues hitting reference. and more power is actually quite cheap is desired later on

yea i was actually looking at some of the emotiva amps for possibly more sound if it is what i desire in the future. get like a 200x3 for the fronts and center. but initially this is definitely not going to happen.

since you brought up the reference level i do have a question for you.

the cm9's are rated around the 89db-ish level. are you stating that the speakers in real world use should have no issues hitting reference levels?

the reason i ask is because i had mentioned i did demo the klipsch rf7 setup, and those definitely did hit reference level, and i know that because the guy had a db monitor and i saw it actually get up that loud. i'm just one that loves to watch movies in a loud environment and enjoy the immersion.

i'm actually going to be testing the cm9 setup again this week, at a different store that is near my job. so i'm going to go on lunch break either today or tomorrow and take another look at it just to see how it sounds again. definitely going to ask him to push it up really loud as well.

Efficiency is not the only rating that is important, Id rather have 89db and low distortion and wide dispersion rather than 91db with more distortion and a narrow dispersion.

Perhaps, but efficiency gives you a double dip here: you're going to run up against distortion from compression effects much less often when your speakers are running well under their maximum power/output. 89db vs 91db isn't huge, but 89 vs 98 or 101 (e.g. the JTR Triple 8/12 HT) is a serious difference when you're running at reference levels.

Sorry for getting confused on the speaker price. I'd still suggest something more efficient than the two-channel stuff, even if the cool active crossover of the Seaton is too pricey...

Perhaps, but efficiency gives you a double dip here: you're going to run up against distortion from compression effects much less often when your speakers are running well under their maximum power/output. 89db vs 91db isn't huge, but 89 vs 98 or 101 (e.g. the JTR Triple 8/12 HT) is a serious difference when you're running at reference levels.

Sorry for getting confused on the speaker price. I'd still suggest something more efficient than the two-channel stuff, even if the cool active crossover of the Seaton is too pricey...

not trying to be a dick or smart ass here, as you seem to know more about the technicalities of all this than i do, but have heard the b&w's I'm looking at at a high level?

i know they are spec'ed at 89db, but i also know that audio specs in general such as rms wattage and what not really don't mean too much in the grand scheme of things, and wasn't sure if this is true for speakers as well as far as db levels go.

i'm seriously wondering too because i've heard the klipsch at reference level and they were clear, however the horn seemed to nearly pierce my ears and i think after a 2 hours movie my ears would be fatigued.

i haven't pushed the cm9's to a REALLY high level, other than for music, in my demo sessions yet. tomorrow i'm going to go demo a movie with them and push them as loud as i can just to see how they sound.

And what many of us don't realize until we hear it, is that clean undistorted loud sound often does not sound that "loud." The key here is that in most or our home listening, there are small amounts of distortion caused by a lack of dynamic headroom (but more on that next month). It's the distortion that makes it sound "loud" in a domestic setting. To remove those distortions and increase dynamic headroom relates to even more power. We've become accustomed to accepting some distortion with our reproduced music, because all amplifier's distortion ratings gradually increase as they approach their output limits or slightly clip the audio signals. When that happens, we turn down the volume, because distortion starts to intrude on our listening pleasure, and it sounds "too loud."

that first part is pretty funny considering i just got my new receiver (that will eventually power the new speakers i get, but for now powering some old jbl's i got back in 2001) and i noticed that when i turned it up loud (0db) that it doesn't actually sound very 'loud' like it mentions in the article. everything is crystal clear, however it isn't that room filling loudness, so i turn it up louder. and i haven't really gotten to a point where it's 'too loud' that it starts to sound distorted.

Perhaps, but efficiency gives you a double dip here: you're going to run up against distortion from compression effects much less often when your speakers are running well under their maximum power/output. 89db vs 91db isn't huge, but 89 vs 98 or 101 (e.g. the JTR Triple 8/12 HT) is a serious difference when you're running at reference levels.

I would say that for most people it isn't an issue. A well-designed speaker (assumption) should not experience significant power compression unless the volume is ear-splittingly loud. Put a 500W transient into an 89 dB/W speaker and you get 116 dB before power compression - most people do not understand how loud this is. For a mid-fi speaker you might lose 2-3 dB in compression there, but you gain that back from the speaker being inside a room as well as having some reinforcement from the other stereo speaker.

There are other factors in play, of course. I do not forget about distortion or the availability of power, but the first is muted by having well-designed speakers, and the second... well, power is fairly cheap nowadays.

EDIT: I should point out that THX requires 105 dB peaks at the listening position. Easily achievable with many setups.

well i was doing some measurements and looking at different picture sizes a little while ago, and I'm 99% going to get a 120" screen. i put some ssf4 up on there (with no sound now though) and was seeing how it looked and i got quite giddy lol. i'm going to check out an FPS on it though before I decide on a screen that large because it would suck to get motion sickness or something on it hah.

well i was doing some measurements and looking at different picture sizes a little while ago, and I'm 99% going to get a 120" screen. i put some ssf4 up on there (with no sound now though) and was seeing how it looked and i got quite giddy lol. i'm going to check out an FPS on it though before I decide on a screen that large because it would suck to get motion sickness or something on it hah.

Wanted the look of the screen floating in space** After more research though I'll probably have to paint others for reflection purposes but I'm not doing that until I get the screen and see how reflections are**

Wanted the look of the screen floating in space** After more research though I'll probably have to paint others for reflection purposes but I'm not doing that until I get the screen and see how reflections are**

at 3k for a sub but buy a JTR Captivator S2 or a Seaton Submersive and be done with it

or DIY

i was doing a little more research and smoeone recommended a pair of JTR captivator with an EP4000 amp to power it, and said i could probably find a deal on them to keep it under $3k.

would you recommend getting 2 separate subs or one like the S2 that has 2 built into 1 box or 2 separate S's so they could be spaced apart?

additionally i'm a bit confused as to if they come with amps built in or not.

also, a lot of the higher end JL's and Velodyne have calibration software built into the sub similar to audyssey and what not. is that really necessary if i already have audyssey in my AVR, and do these JTR subs come with any of that software?